Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-8wtlm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-18T11:22:49.336Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When the simplest voluntary decisions appear patently suboptimal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2019

Emilio Salinas Open the ORCID record for Emilio Salinas [Opens in a new window] ,
Joshua A. Seideman  and
Terrence R. Stanford
Emilio Salinas
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1010. esalinas@wakehealth.edujseidema@wakehealth.edustanford@wakehealth.edu
Joshua A. Seideman
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1010. esalinas@wakehealth.edujseidema@wakehealth.edustanford@wakehealth.edu
Terrence R. Stanford
Affiliation:
Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1010. esalinas@wakehealth.edujseidema@wakehealth.edustanford@wakehealth.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Rahnev & Denison (R&D) catalog numerous experiments in which performance deviates, often in subtle ways, from the theoretical ideal. We discuss an extreme case, an elementary behavior (reactive saccades to single targets) for which a simple contextual manipulation results in responses that are dramatically different from those expected based on reward maximization – and yet are highly informative and amenable to mechanistic examination.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e240
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ding, L. & Hikosaka, O. (2006) Comparison of reward modulation in the frontal eye field and caudate of the macaque. Journal of Neuroscience 26:6695–703.Google Scholar
Feng, S., Holmes, P., Rorie, A. & Newsome, W. T. (2009) Can monkeys choose optimally when faced with noisy stimuli and unequal rewards? PLoS Computational Biology 5(2):e1000284. Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2631644&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.Google Scholar
Hauser, C. K., Zhu, D., Stanford, T. R. & Salinas, E. (2018) Motor selection dynamics in FEF explain the reaction time variance of saccades to single targets. eLife 7:e33456.Google Scholar
Hikosaka, O., Nakamura, K. & Nakahara, H. (2006) Basal ganglia orient eyes to reward. Journal of Neurophysiology 95:567–84.Google Scholar
Ikeda, T. & Hikosaka, O. (2003) Reward-dependent gain and bias of visual responses in primate superior colliculus. Neuron 39:693–700.Google Scholar
Isoda, M. & Hikosaka, O. (2008) A neural correlate of motivational conflict in the superior colliculus of the macaque. Journal of Neurophysiology 100:1332–42.Google Scholar
Lauwereyns, J., Watanabe, K., Coe, B. & Hikosaka, O. (2002) A neural correlate of response bias in monkey caudate nucleus. Nature 418:413–17.Google Scholar
Maunsell, J. H. (2004) Neuronal representations of cognitive state: Reward or attention? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8:261–65.Google Scholar
Peck, C. J., Jangraw, D. C., Suzuki, M., Efem, R. & Gottlieb, J. (2009) Reward modulates attention independently of action value in posterior parietal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 29:11182–91.Google Scholar
Preciado, D., Munneke, J. & Theeuwes, J. (2017) Mixed signals: The effect of conflicting reward- and goal-driven biases on selective attention. Attention Perception & Psychophysics 79:1297–310.Google Scholar
Stanford, T. R., Shankar, S., Massoglia, D. P., Costello, M. G. & Salinas, E. (2010) Perceptual decision making in less than 30 milliseconds. Nature Neuroscience 13:379–85.Google Scholar
Tachibana, Y. & Hikosaka, O. (2012) The primate ventral pallidum encodes expected reward value and regulates motor action. Neuron 76:826–37.Google Scholar
Takikawa, Y., Kawagoe, R. & Hikosaka, O. (2004) A possible role of midbrain dopamine neurons in short- and long-term adaptation of saccades to position-reward mapping. Journal of Neurophysiology 92:2520–29.Google Scholar
Takikawa, Y., Kawagoe, R., Itoh, H., Nakahara, H. & Hikosaka, O. (2002) Modulation of saccadic eye movements by predicted reward outcome. Experimental Brain Research 142:284–91.Google Scholar
Watanabe, M., Cromwell, H. C., Tremblay, L., Hollerman, J. R., Hikosaka, K. & Schultz, W. (2001) Behavioral reactions reflecting differential reward expectations in monkeys. Experimental Brain Research 140:511–18.Google Scholar
Yasuda, M. & Hikosaka, O. (2017) To wait or not to wait—separate mechanisms in the oculomotor circuit of basal ganglia. Frontiers in Neuroanatomy 11:35.Google Scholar